Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 21, 2025

Hammond v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions

Full caption

Chantel Hammond, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions, Inc.

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:25-cv-02796
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
10
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hammond v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions, Inc., Judge Halpern entered a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery and related disclosures.

Who this affects

The parties, their representatives, agents, experts, consultants, litigation-support providers, certain witnesses and other recipients of confidential discovery material, third parties providing discovery, and anyone with actual or constructive notice of the order.

What happened

In Chantel Hammond v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions, Inc., the parties asked the court to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that may be exchanged during discovery. The parties agreed to the order’s terms.

The order limits disclosure of material marked confidential to specified people, including the parties, lawyers, experts, certain witnesses, vendors, and the court. It also sets procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, filing confidential material under seal, handling accidentally disclosed privileged information, and returning or destroying confidential material after the case ends.

The court found good cause and entered the protective order. Judge Philip M. Halpern stated that violations could lead to contempt and that the order would remain binding after the litigation ends.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hammond v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions · No. 7:25-cv-02796
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Oct. 21, 2025

Nature of the Order

This is a stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The parties, through counsel, requested protection for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored order and entered it.

Protected Information and Permitted Disclosure

The order allows a producing party to designate as confidential only material it reasonably and in good faith believes includes previously undisclosed financial information; information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; business, product-development, or marketing plans; personal or intimate information about an individual; or another category the court later protects. Confidential material may be disclosed only to specified recipients, including the parties, counsel, insurers and their counsel, litigation-support vendors, certain mediators or arbitrators, document recipients, potential witnesses, experts and advisers, deposition stenographers, and the court. Some recipients must first sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Confidential discovery material may be used only to prosecute or defend this case and any appeals, not for business, commercial, competitive, or unrelated litigation purposes. The order does not waive objections to discovery, privilege, or other protections, and it does not decide whether evidence will be admissible at trial.

Sealing and Challenges

A party filing material under seal must also publicly file a redacted version and provide the materials required by the court’s Individual Practices. The order states that the court may unseal documents if the required specific findings supporting continued sealing cannot be made, and that confidential treatment is unlikely for material introduced as evidence at trial. Parties may challenge confidentiality designations or request additional disclosure limits, such as attorneys’-eyes-only treatment, and must present unresolved disputes to the court under its Individual Practices.

Privilege and Case Conclusion

If privileged or attorney-work-product material is accidentally disclosed, the disclosure does not waive the protection. The receiving party must return or destroy the material within five business days after notice and provide counsel’s certification. The producing party must then provide a privilege log, and the receiving party may ask the court to compel production without relying on the inadvertent disclosure as a ground.

Within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy confidential material and certify that they retained no copies or summaries. Counsel specifically retained for the action may keep archival copies of certain case materials, but those copies remain subject to the order. The order survives termination of the litigation, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.

Disposition

The court entered the stipulated protective order. This order concerns discovery confidentiality and does not decide the underlying claims or defenses.

The authoritative version

Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.